DOCSLIB.ORG

Hewlett Foundation 2009 Annual Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Hewlett Foundation 2009 Annual Report Hewlett Foundation 2009 Annual Report Making grants to solve social and environmental problems, at home and around the world. EDUCATION | ENVIRONMENT | GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT PERFORMING ARTS | PHILANTHROPY | POPULATION | SPECIAL PROJECTS About Us | Board and Officers | Staff About the Foundation The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation has been making grants since 1967 to solve social and environmental problems at home and around the world. The Hewlett Foundation At A Glance (as of December 31, 2009) Total Assets: $6.87 billion Total dollar amount of grants and gifts awarded in 2009: $235,100,000 Total dollar amount of grants and gifts disbursed in 2009: $345,190,721 Total number of grants and gifts awarded in 2009: 596 Average grant amount in 2009: $397,225 Median grant amount in 2009: $150,000 Number of employees: 104 This year, President Paul Brest’s essay focuses on the newly announced integrated Global Development and Population Program. After more than a year of consultation and planning, the Global Development Program and the Population Program started taking steps to integrate their work into a unified program, recognizing that the work they conduct is mutually beneficial and reinforcing. You can read the essay and read more about the program integration on the next pages. Integrating The Foundation's Global Development and Population Programs* President's Statement - 2009 Annual Report In March 2010, after more than a year's intensive work by the Hewlett Foundation's staff and Board of Directors, the Foundation decided to combine its Global Development and Population programs into a single program. Building on the traditions and commitments of its antecedents, the new program seeks to improve the lives of the world's most vulnerable people, especially women and girls, through more accountable governance, improved reproductive health and rights, access to quality education, and better economic opportunities. This essay describes the background of the Board's decision. History of the Population Program Population was prominent among the issues that animated Bill and Flora Hewlett from the earliest days of the Foundation, with grants to Planned Parenthood Federation of America and Planned Parenthood Association of San Francisco dating back to 1967. At that time, the Foundation was concerned about the disastrous effects of unbridled population growth, and supported family planning as a specific method to combat this problem. In 1977, under the presidency of Roger W. Heyns, the Foundation formally established four programs, all of which remain to this day: Arts and Humanities (now Performing Arts), Education, Environment, and Population. Anne Firth Murray, the first program officer for Population, played a major role in defining its focus: the provision of family planning both domestically and globally. When the Hewlett Foundation was established, population growth was a problem of global dimensions. Economic development, the increased availability of family planning (aided in part by Hewlett and other foundations), and other forces effectively helped reduce population growth over the next half century. (Figures 1 to 4 illustrate these dramatic changes in global demography.) In the twenty-first century, fertility rates remain high mainly in sub-Saharan Africa and other pockets of extreme poverty. This same period also saw a transformation in global consciousness about issues of reproductive health and rights, which crystallized in 1994 in the United Nations International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) in Cairo, Egypt. The resulting Programme of Action links population, women's well-being, and development as essential means for combating poverty and stabilizing population growth.2 The Programme of Action further recognized the intrinsic value of reproductive rights and the need to protect them in all countries, regardless of their rates of population growth. Under the successive leadership3 of Faith Mitchell (1987 to 1992), Nancy Moss (1993 to 1995), Joseph Speidel (1995 to 2002), and Sara Seims (2003 to the present), the Population Program strengthened its commitment to family planning and reproductive health because of their benefits to individuals, societies, and the entire global community. The Program's work focused increasingly on sub-Saharan Africa, where fertility rates remained, and still remain, high. Under Ms. Seims' direction, the Program undertook a major review of its overall strategies. This led to the adoption of the mutually reinforcing goals of "promoting and protecting reproductive health and rights and helping governments stabilize their populations in ways that maximize human well-being and sustain the environment." The Program also supported studies of the relationship between fertility rates and access to quality education, and launched a research initiative to understand the complex relationship between family planning and reproductive health on the one hand, and poverty and economic growth in sub-Saharan Africa on the other. Emergence of the Global Development Program While Population has been among the Foundation's core programs since its origin, grantmaking in the broader arena of global development emerged only in the past decade. In 2002, the Board of Directors approved a three-year exploratory initiative led by Smita Singh to identify international problems that the Foundation could meaningfully address. The initiative made grants in areas including foreign aid effectiveness and agricultural trade reform; journalism, media, and public education about global current affairs; research and policy analysis on development and security concerns; and in-country philanthropy. After initial explorations, the initiative concentrated mainly on challenges facing the developing world. After three years of promising grantmaking, the Board authorized the development of a new Global Development Program, headed by Ms. Singh, with the mission of "improving the lives and livelihoods of people in developing countries, particularly those living on less than $2 a day." After intense research and consultation, the Program developed a strategic plan that was approved by the Board in 2007. It included a set of initiatives designed to overcome significant barriers to equitable growth: • Increasing the transparency and accountability of public spending in order to improve basic services. • Expanding agricultural markets for small farmers. • Improving educational outcomes for children in developing countries. In addition, recognizing the importance of developing countries' having independent capacity for policy analysis, the Program supported indigenous policy research institutions and think tanks throughout the developing world. Although a young program, Global Development quickly gained influence on issues such as reforming development assistance practices, making aid more transparent and accountable, and refocusing global attention on education in developing countries from mere access to quality and outcomes. The Program collaborated in creating the Revenue Watch Institute and the International Initiative for Impact Evaluation, and played a major role in exposing European Union agricultural subsidies and Mexican budget practices to public scrutiny. Collaboration between the Programs Virtually since its beginning, the Foundation has been aware of the factors that connect population and reproductive health issues with the broader global development agenda. Early on, Population's Anne Firth Murray had noted that fertility was affected by a country's stage of economic development and by women's access to education and employment: "We had to provide family planning services for women so they had [the] choice to limit their families, and we also had to develop economically and educationally so people would see the value of having fewer children and . understand that if they could have healthy children, they didn't need to have ten in order to have three or four survive." The emergence of the Global Development Program soon led to collaborations with the Population Program that built on these connections. For example, they undertook a joint initiative on Quality Education in Developing Countries, believing that improved learning outcomes in developing countries would have multiple benefits for economic development, health, individual well-being, and fertility. Given the direct links between education and better quality of life for all, and particularly between girls' education and lower fertility rates, the Foundation saw investment in this initiative as a way to further its overarching goals. Learning from Global Development's work on transparency and accountability, Population launched an initiative for "More Money, Well Spent" on family planning. This effort supports efforts to allocate family planning and reproductive health resources more efficiently and effectively. The two programs seek to ensure that poor people receive high-quality basic services, including clean water, education, and reproductive health. Integrating the Programs As we saw these convergences, Sara Seims, Smita Singh, and I began asking whether the Foundation's goals might be more effectively reached by moving beyond informal collaboration between the programs to formally combining them. We saw particular benefits from placing population issues within the broader global development frame. We also recognized that because both program directors were leaving the Foundation within the coming year and a half, this was an opportune time
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Making Grants to Solve Social and Environmental Problems at Home and Around the World
    Making grants to solve social and environmental problems at home and around the world THE WILLIAM AND FLORA HEWLETT FOUNDATION 2008 Annual Report Forms of Philanthropic Support: The Centrality of Alignment* Paul Brest Nonprofit organizations are the core of civil society. Vibrant organizations require unrestricted capital and need excellent leaders with considerable autonomy to develop and implement their plans. But these organizations and their leaders also depend on funders, who have their own passions, goals, and ideas. How are the interests of donors and nonprofits reconciled in the philanthropic world? Some funders use the power of their purses to resolve the tension in a lopsided way that satisfies their egos but ultimately disserves society. They make small, short-term grants focused on narrowly defined concerns. They require organizations to jump through hoops during the application process, and then micromanage grantees’ activities. In fact, unrestricted, general operating support for organizations accounts for only about 19 percent of all foundation grant dollars.1 Concerned with the pervasive undercapitalization of nonprofit organizations, Independent Sector, Grantmakers for Effective Organizations, and the Nonprofit Finance Fund have strongly advocated that funders provide multi-year, renewable general support.2 At the same time, a small but increasing number of venture philanthropists are providing successful nonprofits the funds necessary to expand.3 Most venture philanthropists support organizations that provide services— education, after-school programs, visits by nurse practitioners. But general support is equally valuable for organizations engaged in research and advocacy, ranging from universities and think tanks to environmental organizations. For all of the value of general support, however, there are often good reasons to fund specific projects.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Content Licensing: Cultivating the Creative Commons
    Open Content Licensing: Cultivating the Creative Commons Principal Editor Professor Brian Fitzgerald Head of School of Law, Queensland University of Technology, Australia With the assistance of Jessica Coates and Suzanne Lewis Sydney Unversity Press Published in Sydney by Sydney University Press University of Sydney NSW 2006 AUSTRALIA Publication date: March 2007 The material in this publication is based on papers presented at the Open Content Licensing: Cultivating the Creative Commons conference held by the Queensland University of Technology (http://www.qut.edu.au) in Brisbane, Australia in January 2005. This publication is an output of the ARC Centre of Excellence for Creative Industries and Innovation (http://www.cci.edu.au), Queensland University of Technology. Unless otherwise stated, the law and services represented in these papers are discussed as they existed in February 2005. ISBN 10 1-920898-51-4 ISBN 13 978-1-920898-51-9 This work is licensed under an Australian Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 License available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/au/. For more information contact Professor Brian Fitzgerald, Faculty of Law, Queensland University of Technology. List of Contributors Richard Neville Professor Arun Sharma Mark Fallu Professor Barry Conyngham AM Greg Lane Professor Brian Fitzgerald Nic Suzor Professor Lawrence Lessig Professor Richard Jones Professor Greg Hearn Professor John Quiggin Dr David Rooney Neeru Paharia Michael Lavarch Stuart Cunningham Dr Terry Cutler Damien O’Brien
    [Show full text]
  • Thick Description of Peer Review Is Required
    Peer Review: Objectivity, Anonymity, Trust A Dissertation Presented by Hans Daniel Ucko to The Graduate School in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Philosophy Stony Brook University May 2020 Copyright by Hans Daniel Ucko 2020 Stony Brook University The Graduate School Hans Daniel Ucko We, the dissertation committee for the above candidate for the Doctor of Philosophy degree, hereby recommend acceptance of this dissertation. Robert Crease, Professor Department of Philosophy Anne O’Byrne Associate Professor Department of Philosophy Harvey Cormier Associate Professor Department of Philosophy George Sterman Distinguished Professor Department of Physics and Astronomy This dissertation is accepted by the Graduate School Eric Wertheimer Dean of the Graduate School ii Abstract of the Dissertation Peer Review: Objectivity, Anonymity, Trust by Hans Daniel Ucko Doctor of Philosophy in Philosophy Stony Brook University 2020 Objectivity is a concept that looms large over science. As a society we approve of objective approaches, methods, and attitudes. Objectivity can mean a lot of things: a correspondence with reality, a reliable epistemological process, or an attitude or stance of a scientist. Peer review is an important part of scientific evaluation. Results do not count as science until they are made public, or published. The means by which scientific manuscripts are found to be suitable for publication is peer review, in which usually an editor consults one or more referees to ask for a judgment on the scientific work by an author or authors. These referees are asked to be representatives of a community, that is, they are asked for an objective evaluation not only from their standpoint but instead standing in for an entire community.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Gaming License, Version 1.0A
    LEGAL INFORMATION Permission to copy, modify and distribute the files collectively known as the System Reference Document (“SRD”) is granted solely through the use of the Open Gaming License, Version 1.0a. This material is being released using the Open Gaming License Version 1.0a and you should read and understand the terms of that license before using this material. The text of the Open Gaming License itself is not Open Game Content. Instructions on using the License are provided within the License itself. The following items are designated Product Identity, as defined in Section 1(e) of the Open Game License Version 1.0a, and are subject to the conditions set forth in Section 7 of the OGL, and are not Open Content: Dungeons & Dragons, D&D, Dungeon Master, Monster Manual, d20 System, Wizards of the Coast, d20 (when used as a trademark), Forgotten Realms, Faerûn, character names (including those used in the names of spells or items), places, Red Wizard of Thay, Heroic Domains of Ysgard, Ever-Changing Chaos of Limbo, Windswept Depths of Pandemonium, Infinite Layers of the Abyss, Tarterian Depths of Carceri, Gray Waste of Hades, Bleak Eternity of Gehenna, Nine Hells of Baator, Infernal Battlefield of Acheron, Clockwork Nirvana of Mechanus, Peaceable Kingdoms of Arcadia, Seven Mounting Heavens of Celestia, Twin Paradises of Bytopia, Blessed Fields of Elysium, Wilderness of the Beastlands, Olympian Glades of Arborea, Concordant Domain of the Outlands, Sigil, Lady of Pain, Book of Exalted Deeds, Book of Vile Darkness, beholder, gauth, carrion crawler, tanar’ri, baatezu, displacer beast, githyanki, githzerai, mind flayer, illithid, umber hulk, yuan-ti.
    [Show full text]
  • This Material Is Covered by the Open Gaming License
    LEGAL INFORMATION Permission to copy, modify and distribute the files collectively known as the System Reference Document (“SRD”) is granted solely through the use of the Open Gaming License, Version 1.0a. This material is being released using the Open Gaming License Version 1.0a and you should read and understand the terms of that license before using this material. The text of the Open Gaming License itself is not Open Game Content. Instructions on using the License are provided within the License itself. The following items are designated Product Identity, as defined in Section 1(e) of the Open Game License Version 1.0a, and are subject to the conditions set forth in Section 7 of the OGL, and are not Open Content: Dungeons & Dragons, D&D, Dungeon Master, Monster Manual, d20 System, Wizards of the Coast, d20 (when used as a trademark), Forgotten Realms, Faerûn, character names (including those used in the names of spells or items), places, Red Wizard of Thay, Heroic Domains of Ysgard, Ever-Changing Chaos of Limbo, Windswept Depths of Pandemonium, Infinite Layers of the Abyss, Tarterian Depths of Carceri, Gray Waste of Hades, Bleak Eternity of Gehenna, Nine Hells of Baator, Infernal Battlefield of Acheron, Clockwork Nirvana of Mechanus, Peaceable Kingdoms of Arcadia, Seven Mounting Heavens of Celestia, Twin Paradises of Bytopia, Blessed Fields of Elysium, Wilderness of the Beastlands, Olympian Glades of Arborea, Concordant Domain of the Outlands, Sigil, Lady of Pain, Book of Exalted Deeds, Book of Vile Darkness, beholder, gauth, carrion crawler, tanar’ri, baatezu, displacer beast, githyanki, githzerai, mind flayer, illithid, umber hulk, yuan-ti.
    [Show full text]
  • Exploring Precision FDA, an Online Platform for Crowdsourcing Genomics Jordan Paradise Loyola University Chicago, School of Law, [email protected]
    Loyola University Chicago, School of Law LAW eCommons Faculty Publications & Other Works 2018 Exploring Precision FDA, an Online Platform for Crowdsourcing Genomics Jordan Paradise Loyola University Chicago, School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://lawecommons.luc.edu/facpubs Part of the Administrative Law Commons, and the Food and Drug Law Commons Recommended Citation Jordan Paradise, Exploring Precision FDA, an Online Platform for Crowdsourcing Genomics, 58 Jurimetrics J. 267-282 (2018) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by LAW eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications & Other Works by an authorized administrator of LAW eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. EXPLORING PRECISION FDA, AN ONLINE PLATFORM FOR CROWDSOURCING GENOMICS Jordan Paradise* ABSTRACT: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has created an online platform for the next generation sequencing community, enabling users to evaluate biomarker in- formation and share resources. This article examines this online platform and offers sev- eral observations about potential legal and regulatory implications. CITATION: Jordan Paradise, Exploring PrecisionFDA, an Online Platform for CrowdsourcingGenomics, 58 JuRIMETRIcS J. 267-282 (2018). Precision medicine is here, with rapid advancements in the technologies, tools, and life-saving products entering the market for the treatment of serious and life-threatening disease. In May 2017, the United States Food and Drug Ad- ministration (FDA) approved the first cancer treatment for solid tumors based on a genetic biomarker rather than the tissue of origin.1 One month later, the agency approved a companion diagnostic panel that uses next generation se- quencing (NGS) to simultaneously screen a genetic sample for 23 cancer genes, three of which have FDA-approved therapies for non-small cell lung cancer.2 *Georgia Reithal Professor of Law, Loyola University Chicago School of Law.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Innovation and External Sources of Innovation. an Opportunity to Fuel
    Schuhmacher et al. J Transl Med (2018) 16:119 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12967-018-1499-2 Journal of Translational Medicine REVIEW Open Access Open innovation and external sources of innovation. An opportunity to fuel the R&D pipeline and enhance decision making? Alexander Schuhmacher1* , Oliver Gassmann2, Nigel McCracken3 and Markus Hinder4 Abstract Historically, research and development (R&D) in the pharmaceutical sector has predominantly been an in-house activity. To enable investments for game changing late-stage assets and to enable better and less costly go/no-go decisions, most companies have employed a fail early paradigm through the implementation of clinical proof-of-con- cept organizations. To fuel their pipelines, some pioneers started to complement their internal R&D eforts through collaborations as early as the 1990s. In recent years, multiple extrinsic and intrinsic factors induced an opening for external sources of innovation and resulted in new models for open innovation, such as open sourcing, crowdsourc- ing, public–private partnerships, innovations centres, and the virtualization of R&D. Three factors seem to determine the breadth and depth regarding how companies approach external innovation: (1) the company’s legacy, (2) the company’s willingness and ability to take risks and (3) the company’s need to control IP and competitors. In addition, these factors often constitute the major hurdles to efectively leveraging external opportunities and assets. Conscious and diferential choices of the R&D and business models for diferent companies and diferent divisions in the same company seem to best allow a company to fully exploit the potential of both internal and external innovations.
    [Show full text]
  • The Future Role of HPC in Medical Product Decision Making
    The Future Role of HPC in Medical Product Decision Making LLNL-TR-690736 This document was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government. Neither the United States government nor Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC, nor any of their employees makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States government or Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC, and shall not be used for advertising or product endorsement purposes. This work performed under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Energy by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory under Contract DE-AC52-07NA27344. 1 Summary Report on a Workshop on the Future Role of High Performance Computing in Medical Product Decision Making Abstract On September 10, 2015, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory’s Center for Global Security Research1 and High Performance Computing Innovation Center2 hosted a workshop in Silver Spring, Maryland, on the “Future Role of High Performance Computing (HPC) in Medical Product Decision Making.” Stakeholders from academia, industry, national laboratories and government agencies attended and discussed the role of HPC in making regulatory decisions.
    [Show full text]
  • Legal Framework for E-Research: Realising the Potential, Fitzgerald, Brian F., Eds
    QUT Digital Repository: http://eprints.qut.edu.au/ (2008) Legal Framework for E-Research: Realising the Potential, Fitzgerald, Brian F., Eds. Sydney University Press. © Copyright 2008 Sydney University Press (Collection) / Individual authors (Papers) This work (with the exception of Chapter 2: The Fifth Dimension and Chapter 9: NIH Data and Resource Sharing, Data Release and Intellectual Property Policies for Genomics Community Resource Projects) is licensed under an Australian Creative Commons 'By Attribution', 'Non Commercial', 'No Derivative Works.' 2.5 Licence <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/au/>. See http://creativecommons.org.au/licences for more details. Chapter 2: The Fifth Dimension Licence Information Where copyright subsists in this chapter, which is a United States Government Work under s 105 of the U.S. Copyright Act, the work is licensed under a United States Creative Commons 'By Attribution' 3.0 License <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/us/>. Chapter 9: NIH Data and Resource Sharing, Data Release and Intellectual Property Policies for Genomics Community Resource Projects Licence Information Where copyright subsists in this chapter, which is a United States Government Work under s 105 of the U.S. Copyright Act, the work is licensed under a United States Creative Commons 'By Attribution' 3.0 License <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/us/>. LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR e-RESEARCH: REALISING THE POTENTIAL EDITED BY BRIAN FITZGERALD BA (Griff), LLB (Hons) (QUT), BCL (Oxon), LLM (Harv), PhD (Griff)
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Niva Elkin-Koren* Creative Commons Is a Non-Profit US-Based
    ELKIN-KOREN – DRAFT FEBRUARY 14, 2006 2006 EXPLORING CREATIVE COMMONS 1 EXPLORING CREATIVE COMMONS: A SKEPTICAL VIEW OF A WORTHY PURSUIT THE FUTURE OF THE PUBLIC DOMAIN (P. Bernt Hugenholtz & Lucie Guibault, eds.) Kluwer Law International, forthcoming 2006. Niva Elkin-Koren* I. INTRODUCTION Creative Commons is a non-profit US-based organization, which operates a licensing platform to promote free use of creative works. This innovative initiative is using license agreements for the purpose of strengthening the public domain. The high cost associated with securing a license to use works becomes a serious obstacle for the use and reuse of works created by others. By reducing the legal costs associated with the use of creative content, Creative Commons seeks to make it easier for non-profit players to engage in creative enterprises. The licensing platform aims at lowering the transaction costs of both licensing and acquiring a license for reuse. At the producer's end, authors are offered a licensing scheme for distributing their works for non-commercial use while at the same time safeguarding those works against abuse and misappropriation of their efforts by asserting copyrights. The idea is to facilitate the release of creative works under generous license terms that would make works available for sharing and reuse. At the users' end, the platform is expected to make it easier for prospective creators to identify works, which are available under generous terms, for subsequent creation. Creative Commons advocates the use of copyrights in a rather subversive way that would ultimately change their meaning. Its strategy does not aim at creating a public domain, at least not in the strict legal sense of a regime that is free of any exclusive proprietary rights.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Content - Bestandsaufnahme Und Versuch Einer Definition
    Open Content - Bestandsaufnahme und Versuch einer Definition Diplomarbeit im Fach Informatik Vorgelegt von Andreas John Waldeyerstr. 12, 10247 Berlin Matrikelnummer: 181939 Angefertigt am Institut für Wirtschaftsinformatik und Quantitative Methoden der Technischen Universität Berlin, Fakultät IV (Informatik) Prof. Dr. iur. Bernd Lutterbeck Betreuer: Matthias Bärwolf Abgabe der Arbeit: 14.02.2006 Open Content - Seite 2 I. Zusammenfassung Unter dem Schlagwort Open Content soll der Erfolg von Open-Source-Software auf andere Werkgattungen übertragen werden. Aufwind erhält die Idee des Open Content durch die zunehmende Ausweitung und Befestigung des geistigen Eigentums durch Recht und Architektur, die sich konträr zu den Möglichkeiten digitaler Technologien und weltweiten Networkings verhält. Um Autoren und Künstlern eine klar erkennbare Alternative zu diesen Entwicklungen zu bieten, soll diese Arbeit helfen, den immer noch verschwommenen Begriff Open Content zu schärfen. Anhand einer strukturierten Beobachtung potenzieller Open-Content- Phänomene und eines Vergleiches mit Open-Source-Software wird gezeigt: Hauptthese: Die Prinzipien von Open-Source-Software lassen sich nur dann sinnvoll auf andere Werkgattungen übertragen, wenn die Eigenschaften von OSS nicht formal übernommen, sondern in den Kontext der anderen Werkgattungen übersetzt werden. Auf Basis der gewonnenen Erkenntnisse wird ein Definitionsentwurf im Sinne einer Übersetzung zur Diskussion gestellt. Konsequenz dieser Übersetzung ist u.a., dass Modifizierbarkeit und kommerzielle Nutzung und Verwertung keine konstituierenden Eigenschaften von Open Content sind. Der Definitionsentwurf lautet im Volltext: Definitionsentwurf: Open Content sind schöpferische Werke, wie z.B. Bilder, Musik oder Artikel, mit Ausnahme von Software, die derart veröffentlicht wurden, dass sie ohne die Erlaubnis eines anderen oder durch eine neutral erteilte Erlaubnis an jedermann konsumiert, zitiert und mindestens nichtkommerziell kopiert und verbreitet werden können.
    [Show full text]
  • What Contracts Cannot Do: the Limits of Private Ordering in Facilitating a Creative Commons
    Fordham Law Review Volume 74 Issue 2 Article 3 2005 What Contracts Cannot Do: The Limits of Private Ordering in Facilitating a Creative Commons Niva Elkin-Koren Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Niva Elkin-Koren, What Contracts Cannot Do: The Limits of Private Ordering in Facilitating a Creative Commons , 74 Fordham L. Rev. 375 (2005). Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol74/iss2/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. It has been accepted for inclusion in Fordham Law Review by an authorized editor of FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. For more information, please contact [email protected]. What Contracts Cannot Do: The Limits of Private Ordering in Facilitating a Creative Commons Cover Page Footnote Professor, University of Haifa School of Law. I wish to thank Yochai Benkler, Michael Birnhack, Julie Cohen, Rochelle Dryfuss, Kevin Davis, Bernt Hugenholtz, Mathias Klang, Lawrence Lessig, Jessica Litman, Neil Netanel, David Nimmer, Helen Nissenbaum, Gideon Parchomovsky, Eli Salzberger, Anthony Reese, Pamela Samuelson, Katrina Wyman, and Diane Zimmerman for their comments and criticism on an earlier draft. I also thank the participants at the IViR workshop on Commodification of Information, Amsterdam, July 2004, the Colloquium on Information Technology and Society, Information Law Institute, NYU School of Law and UCLA, and the participants of faculty workshops at the University of Connecticut Law School, Georgetown University Law Center, and NYU School of Law for helpful comments and discussions.
    [Show full text]